Optimizing Orthogeriatric Hip Fracture Care: Why Fracture Type Matters.

Hip fractures significantly impact morbidity and mortality among frail older adults, posing ongoing challenges in orthogeriatric care despite significant advancements. Established in the 1960s by Devas and Irvine, this field integrates orthopedics, trauma services, and geriatric medicine to address the complex needs of this population comprehensively. A critical and underexplored aspect is the precise identification and tailored treatment of various fracture types, each linked to unique clinical challenges and outcomes. This special article emphasizes the complex interplay between specific fracture types, their management options, and the roles of comorbidity and polypharmacy, highlighting the essential role of orthogeriatricians. Orthogeriatricians navigate the complexities posed by comorbidities, frailty, and polypharmacy, significantly influencing treatment outcomes. Their roles have expanded to include decision making about both operative and nonoperative strategies, emphasizing patient-centered care and moving beyond simplistic categorizations of "hip fractures." As future experts on the nuances of fracture types and their broader health implications, orthogeriatricians are also crucial in advancing treatment protocols that address preoperative and postoperative needs. Their comprehensive knowledge ensures effective in-hospital management and postdischarge planning, aligning treatment strategies with the holistic needs of frail older adults. The ongoing evolution of orthogeriatric practices promises to enhance decision-making and patient outcomes through a more informed and integrated care approach.

The effect of current antithrombotic therapy on mortality in nursing home residents with COVID-19: a multicentre retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The first wave of COVID led to an alarmingly high mortality rate among nursing home residents (NHRs). In hospitalised patients, the use of anticoagulants may be associated with a favourable prognosis. However, it is unknown whether the use of antithrombotic medication also protected NHRs from COVID-19-related mortality. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the effect of current antithrombotic therapy in NHRs with COVID-19 on 30-day all-cause mortality during the first COVID-19 wave. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study linking electronic health records and pharmacy data in NHRs with COVID-19. A propensity score was used to match NHRs with current use of therapeutic dose anticoagulants to NHRs not using anticoagulant medication. The primary outcome was 30-day all-cause mortality, which was evaluated using a logistic regression model. In a secondary analysis, multivariable logistic regression was performed in the complete study group to compare NHRs with current use of therapeutic dose anticoagulants and those with current use of antiplatelet therapy to those without such medication. RESULTS: We included 3521 NHRs with COVID-19 based on a positive RT-PCR for SARS-CoV-2 or with a well-defined clinical suspicion of COVID-19. In the matched propensity score analysis, NHRs with current use of therapeutic dose anticoagulants had a significantly lower all-cause mortality (OR = 0.73; 95% CI: 0.58-0.92) compared to NHRs who did not use therapeutic anticoagulants. In the secondary analysis, current use of therapeutic dose anticoagulants (OR: 0.62; 95% CI: 0.48-0.82) and current use of antiplatelet therapy (OR 0.80; 95% CI: 0.64-0.99) were both associated with decreased mortality. CONCLUSIONS: During the first COVID-19 wave, therapeutic anticoagulation and antiplatelet use were associated with a reduced risk of all-cause mortality in NHRs. Whether these potentially protective effects are maintained in vaccinated patients or patients with other COVID-19 variants, remains unknown.

The Incidence of Pulmonary Embolism in Hospitalized Non-ICU Patients with COVID-19 during the First Wave: A Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study in the Netherlands.

INTRODUCTION: During the first COVID-19 outbreak in 2020 in the Netherlands, the incidence of pulmonary embolism (PE) appeared to be high in COVID-19 patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). This study was performed to evaluate the incidence of PE during hospital stay in COVID-19 patients not admitted to the ICU. METHODS: Data were retrospectively collected from 8 hospitals in the Netherlands. Patients admitted between February 27, 2020, and July 31, 2020, were included. Data extracted comprised clinical characteristics, medication use, first onset of COVID-19-related symptoms, admission date due to COVID-19, and date of PE diagnosis. Only polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-positive patients were included. All PEs were diagnosed with computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA). RESULTS: Data from 1,852 patients who were admitted to the hospital ward were collected. Forty patients (2.2%) were diagnosed with PE within 28 days following hospital admission. The median time to PE since admission was 4.5 days (IQR 0.0-9.0). In all 40 patients, PE was diagnosed within the first 2 weeks after hospital admission and for 22 (55%) patients within 2 weeks after onset of symptoms. Patient characteristics, pre-existing comorbidities, anticoagulant use, and laboratory parameters at admission were not related to the development of PE. CONCLUSION: In this retrospective multicenter cohort study of 1,852 COVID-19 patients only admitted to the non-ICU wards, the incidence of CTPA-confirmed PE was 2.2% during the first 4 weeks after onset of symptoms and occurred exclusively within 2 weeks after hospital admission.

Unlocking Deprescribing Potential in Nursing Homes: Insights from a Focus Group Study with Healthcare Professionals.

BACKGROUND: The nursing home population is characterized by multimorbidity and disabilities, which often result in extensive prescription of medication and subsequent polypharmacy. Deprescribing, a planned and supervised process of dose reduction or total cessation of medication, is a solution to combat this. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to identify barriers and enablers of deprescribing as experienced by nursing home physicians (NHPs) and collaborating pharmacists in the specific nursing home setting. METHODS: This qualitative study utilized a semi-structured interview format with two focus groups consisting of a mix of NHPs and pharmacists. Directed content analysis was performed based on the Theoretical Domains Framework, a validated framework for understanding determinants of behavior change among health care professionals. RESULTS: Sixteen health care professionals participated in two focus groups, including 13 NHPs and three pharmacists. The participating NHPs and pharmacists believed that deprescribing is a valuable process with enablers, such as multidisciplinary collaboration, good communication with patients and family, and involvement of the nursing staff. NHPs and pharmacists view deprescribing as a core task and feel assured in their ability to carry it out successfully. However, they also noted barriers: deprescribing is time-consuming; communication with residents, their relatives or medical specialists is difficult; and electronic patient systems often do not adequately support it. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides insight into the various barriers and enablers faced by NHPs and pharmacists when deprescribing in nursing homes. Specific for this population, deprescribing barriers focus on communication (with residents and their relatives, and also with medical specialists) and resources, while knowledge and expertise are mentioned as enablers.

Low Levels of Serum and Intracellular Vitamin C in Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients.

Vitamin C is a crucial micronutrient for human immune cell function and has potent antioxidant properties. It is hypothesized that vitamin C serum levels decline during infection. However, the precise mechanisms remain unknown. To gain deeper insights into the true role of vitamin C during infections, we aimed to evaluate the body's vitamin C storage during a SARS-CoV-2 infection. In this single-center study, we examined serum and intracellular vitamin C levels in peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) of 70 hospitalized COVID-19 patients on the first and fifth days of hospitalization. Also, clinical COVID-19 severity was evaluated at these timepoints. Our findings revealed a high prevalence of hypovitaminosis C and vitamin C deficiency in hospitalized COVID-19 patients (36% and 15%). Moreover, patients with severe or critical disease exhibited a higher prevalence of low serum vitamin C levels than those with moderate illness. Serum vitamin C levels had a weak negative correlation with clinical COVID-19 severity classification on the day of hospitalization; however, there was no correlation with intracellular vitamin C. Intracellular vitamin C levels were decreased in this cohort as compared to a healthy cohort and showed further decline during hospitalization, while serum levels showed no relevant change. Based on this observation, it can be suggested that the reduction of intracellular vitamin C may be attributed to its antioxidative function, the need for replenishing serum levels, or enhanced turnover by immune cells. These data give an incentive to further investigate the role of intracellular vitamin C in a larger and more heterogeneous cohort as well as the underlying mechanisms.

Clinical Decision Support Systems in Hospitalized Older Patients: An Exploratory Analysis in a Real-Life Clinical Setting.

BACKGROUND: Inappropriate prescribing is associated with negative patient outcomes. In hospitalized patients, the use of Clinical Decision Support Systems (CDSSs) may reduce inappropriate prescribing and thereby improve patient-related outcomes. However, recently published large clinical trials (OPERAM and SENATOR) have shown negative results on the use of CDSSs and patient outcomes and strikingly low acceptance of recommendations. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of the present study was to investigate the use of a CDSS in a real-life clinical setting of hospitalized older patients. As such, we report on the real-life pattern of this in-hospital implemented CDSS, including (i) whether generated alerts were resolved; (ii) whether a recorded action by the pharmacist led to an improved number of resolved alerts; and (iii) the natural course of generated alerts, in particular of those in the non-intervention group; as these data are largely lacking in current studies. METHODS: Hospitalized patients, aged 60 years and older, admitted to Zuyderland Medical Centre, the Netherlands, in 2018 were included. The evaluation of the CDSS was investigated using a database used for standard care. Alongside demographic and clinical data, we also collected the total numbers of CDSS alerts, the number of alerts 'handled' by the pharmacist, those that resulted in an action by the pharmacist, and finally the outcome of the alerts at day 1 and day 3 after the alert was generated. RESULTS: A total of 3574 unique hospitalized patients, mean age 76.7 (SD 8.3) years and 53% female, were included. From these patients, 8073 alerts were generated, of which 7907 (97.9% of total) were handled by the pharmacist (day 1). In 51.6% of the alerts handled by the pharmacist, an action was initiated, resulting in 36.1% of the alerts resolved after day 1, compared with 27.3% if the pharmacist did not perform an action (p < 0.001). On day 3, in 52.6% of the alerts an action by the pharmacist was initiated, resulting in 62.4% resolved alerts, compared with 48.0% when no action was performed (p < 0.001). In the category renal function, the percentages differed significantly between an action versus no action of the pharmacist at day 1 and at day 3 (16.6% vs 10.6%, p < 0.001 [day 1]; 29.8% vs 19.4%, p < 0.001 [day 3]). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates the pattern and natural course of clinical alerts of an in-hospital implemented CDSS in a real-life clinical setting of hospitalized older patients. Besides the already known beneficial effect of actions by pharmacists, we have also shown that many alerts become resolved without any specific intervention. As such, our study provides an important insight into the spontaneous course of resolved alerts, since these data are currently lacking in the literature.

Evaluation of a multifaceted medication review in older patients in the outpatient setting: a before-and-after study.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of medication-related emergency department visits and acute hospital admissions in older patients is rising due to the ageing of the population and increasing prevalence of multimorbidity and associated polypharmacy. AIM: To explore whether a combined medication review performed in the outpatient setting reduces the number of medication-related emergency department visits and hospital (re)admissions. METHOD: All consecutive patients visiting the geriatric outpatient clinic underwent a multifaceted medication review (i.e. evaluation by at least a geriatrician, and/or pharmacist and use of clinical decision support system). Subsequently, we analysed the number of, and reason for, emergency department visits, acute hospital admissions and readmissions in the year prior to and the year following the index-date (date of first presentation and medication review). RESULTS: A multifaceted medication review reduced the number of potentially medication-related emergency department visits (38.9% vs. 19.6%, p < 0.01), although the total number of ED visits or acute hospital admissions per patient in the year before and after medication review did not differ. CONCLUSION: A multifaceted medication review performed in the outpatient clinic reduced the number of potentially medication-related emergency department visits and could therefore reduce negative health outcomes and healthcare costs.